Bill Joy For New National CTO Post?

jddeluxe writes "In an article in today's NY Times, John Doerr of Kleiner-Perkins proffered up Bill Joy's name when queried by Barack Obama for a recommendation for the position of Chief Technology Officer of the Unites States which Obama has promised to create and that the country is overdue to have. I think that's a brilliant idea, and while you're at it, have the FCC report to him as well, why don't you?" If Bill is unavailable, I'll throw my hat in the ring, although I'm holding out for Secretary of Tubes.

Comments

Re:I'd rather see someone involved in Free Softwar

[Maximum Prophet]

While Stallman would make an excellent adviser to the National CTO, he's too much of a "Throw the baby out with the bathwater" kind of guy. While I agree with RMS most of the time, that kind of personality doesn't last long in US politics.

About time

[Drakkenmensch]

Isn't it time we had someone in charge of evaluating new technologies who actually KNOWS how computers work, rather than having to refer to the opinions of out of touch people who still struggle with their VCR flashing 12:00 over and over since 1986?

Re:About time

[Anonymous Coward]

The simple answer is BOTH. We've got 300 million people, surely we can find a few who have a reasonable amount of both technical competency and vision. One without the other to balance it is worse than useless.

No need

[Kohath]

We don't need a national CTO. We can make our own technology decisions without the government telling us what to do.

Re:No need

[Deton8]

Amen, brother. How about a national "Chief Keep the Fucking Government the Hell Out of our Way Officer"?

Re:No need

[postbigbang]

You dolt.

The government has millions of computers, and you don't want someone to set policy? Look at what the mindless, out of control, dead in a ditch projects have cost us.

They're not setting policy FOR YOU, nitwit-- for the government. DO what you want. Let someone put reason into executive branch decision making in government IT!!

Re:I'd rather see someone involved in Free Softwar

[zappepcs]

This thread points out the problem of anointing one person as CTO. Hate to say it but this is one of those things that might do better with a board, not a leader. That is to say that while there may be a judge, it's the jury that counts. Using one man is not enough, even the SCOTUS has nine. When it's important enough to do something, it's important enough to do it right. RMS should probably be on the jury, along with other notable technology evangelists.

Re:I'd rather see someone involved in Free Softwar

[squiggleslash]

I don't think RMS would even take it. Being in government requires adherence to a set of principles that many people end up finding reduces their ability to be principled. As an example, RMS would be required to back, in public, copyright law policies that he in private would vehemently disagree with. I just don't see RMS doing that, he's too much of a man of principle.

Re:I'd rather see someone involved in Free Softwar

[Alomex]

I just don't see RMS doing that, he's too much of a man of principle.

It goes beyond that. Certain people define themselves as opposition, as being not-the-man, and as such are uncomfortable in any position of authority, even if their principles were in no way being challenged.

These people serve a valuable role in society, but it is not within the corridors of power.

Re:I'd rather see someone involved in Free Softwar

[Jeff Hornby]

I don't know how to break this to you but the position of National CTO isn't quite as important as the role of SCOTUS. Upholding the laws and constitutional freedoms of the citizenry is much more important than what IM client government employees wil be allowed to use.